Freehand three-dimensional echocardiographic evaluation of the effect of telmisartan compared with hydrochlorothiazide on left ventricular mass in hypertensive patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension: a multicentre study

First-line diuretics versus other classes of antihypertensive drugs for hypertension

BACKGROUND

Different first-line drug classes for patients with hypertension are often assumed to have similar effectiveness with respect to reducing mortality and morbidity outcomes, and lowering blood pressure. First-line low-dose thiazide diuretics have been previously shown to have the best mortality and morbidity evidence when compared with placebo or no treatment. Head-to-head comparisons of thiazides with other blood pressure-lowering drug classes would demonstrate whether there are important differences.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of first-line diuretic drugs with other individual first-line classes of antihypertensive drugs on mortality, morbidity, and withdrawals due to adverse effects in patients with hypertension. Secondary objectives included assessments of the need for added drugs, drug switching, and blood pressure-lowering.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Hypertension's Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Hypertension Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trials registers to March 2021. We also checked references and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. A top-up search of the Specialized Register was carried out in June 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized active comparator trials of at least one year's duration were included. Trials had a clearly defined intervention arm of a first-line diuretic (thiazide, thiazide-like, or loop diuretic) compared to another first-line drug class: beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, alpha adrenergic blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, direct renin inhibitors, or other antihypertensive drug classes. Studies had to include clearly defined mortality and morbidity outcomes (serious adverse events, total cardiovascular events, stroke, coronary heart disease (CHD), congestive heart failure, and withdrawals due to adverse effects).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 trials with 26 comparator arms randomizing over 90,000 participants. The findings are relevant to first-line use of drug classes in older male and female hypertensive patients (aged 50 to 75) with multiple co-morbidities, including type 2 diabetes. First-line thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics were compared with beta-blockers (six trials), calcium channel blockers (eight trials), ACE inhibitors (five trials), and alpha-adrenergic blockers (three trials); other comparators included angiotensin II receptor blockers, aliskiren (a direct renin inhibitor), and clonidine (a centrally acting drug). Only three studies reported data for total serious adverse events: two studies compared diuretics with calcium channel blockers and one with a direct renin inhibitor. Compared to first-line beta-blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.10; 5 trials, 18,241 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (5.4% versus 4.8%; RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.00; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; absolute risk reduction (ARR) 0.6%, moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in stroke (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.09; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; low-certainty), CHD (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.07; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; low-certainty), or heart failure (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.19; 1 trial, 6569 participants; low-certainty), and probably reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (10.1% versus 7.9%; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.85; 5 trials, 18,501 participants; ARR 2.2%; moderate-certainty). Compared to first-line calcium channel blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.08; 7 trials, 35,417 participants; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in serious adverse events (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.24; 2 trials, 7204 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (14.3% versus 13.3%; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; ARR 1.0%; moderate-certainty), probably result in little to no difference in stroke (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.18; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; moderate-certainty) or CHD (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.08; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce heart failure (4.4% versus 3.2%; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.82; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; ARR 1.2%; moderate-certainty), and may reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (7.6% versus 6.2%; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.88; 7 trials, 33,908 participants; ARR 1.4%; low-certainty). Compared to first-line ACE inhibitors, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.07; 3 trials, 30,961 participants; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in total cardiovascular events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.02; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce stroke slightly (4.7% versus 4.1%; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.99; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; ARR 0.6%; moderate-certainty), probably result in little to no difference in CHD (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.12; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; moderate-certainty) or heart failure (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; 2 trials, 30,392 participants; moderate-certainty), and probably reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (3.9% versus 2.9%; RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.84; 3 trials, 25,254 participants; ARR 1.0%; moderate-certainty). Compared to first-line alpha-blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.09; 1 trial, 24,316 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (12.1% versus 9.0%; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.80; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; ARR 3.1%; moderate-certainty) and stroke (2.7% versus 2.3%; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.01; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; ARR 0.4%; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in CHD (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.11; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce heart failure (5.4% versus 2.8%; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.58; 1 trial, 24,316 participants; ARR 2.6%; moderate-certainty), and may reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (1.3% versus 0.9%; RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.89; 3 trials, 24,772 participants; ARR 0.4%; low-certainty). For the other drug classes, data were insufficient. No antihypertensive drug class demonstrated any clinically important advantages over first-line thiazides.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When used as first-line agents for the treatment of hypertension, thiazides and thiazide-like drugs likely do not change total mortality and likely decrease some morbidity outcomes such as cardiovascular events and withdrawals due to adverse effects, when compared to beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, ACE inhibitors, and alpha-blockers.

Hydrochlorothiazide and alternative diuretics versus renin-angiotensin system inhibitors for the regression of left ventricular hypertrophy: a head-to-head meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Found in 36-41% of hypertension, elevated left ventricular mass (LVM) independently predicts cardiovascular events and total mortality. Conversely, drug-induced regression of LVM predicts improved outcomes. Previous studies have favored renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASIs) over other antihypertensives for reducing LVM but ignored differences among thiazide-type diuretics. From evidence regarding potency, cardiovascular events, and electrolytes, we hypothesized a priori that 'CHIP' diuretics [CHlorthalidone, Indapamide and Potassium-sparing Diuretic/hydrochlorothiazide (PSD/HCTZ)] would rival RASIs for reducing LVM.

METHOD AND RESULTS

Systematic review yielded 12 relevant double-blind randomized trials. CHIPs were more closely associated with reduced LVM than HCTZ (P = 0.004), indicating that RASIs must be compared with each diuretic separately. Publication bias favoring RASIs was corrected by cumulative analysis. For reducing LVM, HCTZ tended to be less effective than RASIs. However, the following surpassed RASIs: chlorthalidone Hedge's G: -0.37 (95% CI -0.72 to -0.02), P = 0.036; indapamide -0.20 (-0.39 to -0.01), P = 0.035; all CHIPs combined (with 61% of patients in one trial) -0.25 (-0.41to -0.09), P = 0.002. Statistical significance (P < 0.05) did not depend on any one trial. CHIPs reduction in LVM was 37% greater than that from RASIs. CHIPs superiority tended to increase with trial duration, from a negligible effect at 0.5 year to a maximal effect at 0.9-1.0 years: -0.26 (-0.43 to -0.09), P = 0.003. Fifty-eight percent of patients had information on echocardiographic components of LVM: relative to RASIs, CHIPs significantly reduced end-diastolic LV internal dimension (EDLVID): -0.18 (-0.36 to -0.00), P = 0.046. Strength of evidence favoring CHIPs over RASIs was at least moderate.

CONCLUSION

In these novel results in patients with hypertension, CHIPs surpassed RASIs for reducing LVM and EDLVID.

Diuretics are Similar to Losartan on Echocardiographic Target-Organ Damage in Stage I Hypertension. PREVER-Treatment Study

Blood pressure (BP)-lowering therapy improves left ventricular (LV) parameters of hypertensive target-organ damage in stage II hypertension, but whether there is a drug-class difference in echocardiographic parameters in stage I hypertension patients is less often studied. In the PREVER treatment study, where individuals with stage I hypertension were randomized for treatment with diuretics (chlorthalidone/amiloride) or losartan, 110 participants accepted to participate in a sub-study, where two-dimensional echocardiograms were performed at baseline and after 18 months of antihypertensive treatment. As in the general study, systolic BP reduction was similar with diuretics or with losartan. Echocardiographic parameters showed small but significant changes in both treatment groups, with a favorable LV remodeling with antihypertensive treatment for 18 months when target blood pressure was achieved either with chlorthalidone/amiloride or with losartan as the initial treatment strategy. In conclusion, even in stage I hypertension, blood pressure reduction is associated with improvement in echocardiographic parameters, either with diuretics or losartan as first-drug regimens.

Comparative Efficacy of Angiotensin II Antagonists in Essential Hypertension: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the long-term clinical benefits of individual members of angiotensin II receptor blockers is limited given the lack of head-to-head studies. We conducted a network meta-analysis to determine the comparative efficacy of different members within this drug class with respect to outcomes of (i) blood pressure reduction (at 24 and 52 weeks) and (ii) prevention of cardiovascular disease (>104 weeks).

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted - Protocol registration: (PROSPERO - CRD42014007067) - to identify relevant literature from the following databases: Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline and EMBASE; searched from inception to July 2016. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they reported long-term effectiveness relating to blood pressure, mortality, myocardial infarction or stroke. Eligible studies included those with placebo or specific active-treatment comparators (either another angiotensin II receptor blockers or hydrochlorothiazide). A Bayesian random-effects network model was used to combine direct within-trial comparisons between treatment groups with indirect evidence from other trials.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies were identified, representing 28 unique trials. Blood pressure reduction, based on 12 studies (n=807) with fixed dosing regimen, was found to be similar amongst members of the angiotensin receptor blocker drug class at both 24 and 52 weeks. A network meta-analysis of five studies (n=16,716) with a treat-to-target approach found that prevention of all-cause mortality, stroke and myocardial infarction was similar across the angiotensin-receptor blockers therapies initiated.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence is insufficient to show differences in any members within the angiotensin II receptor blocker drug class with respect to blood pressuring lowering effects or a reduction in cardiovascular diseases.

Pre-Clinical and Clinical Experience of Telmisartan in Cardiac Remodelling

Epidemiological studies have established that left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular and cerebrovascular morbidity and mortality. In turn, hypertension is a well-established risk factor for LVH. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring has shown that 24-h mean ambulatory blood pressure is a particularly powerful predictor of LVH, being superior to casual clinic blood pressure measurements. The magnitude of the rise in blood pressure in the early morning correlates with the extent of LVH. Prospective studies have shown the advantageous effects of anti-hypertensive therapy on LVH in terms of regression of left ventricular mass (LVM) and subsequent reduction in overt cardiovascular disease. Meta-analysis has identified differences in the ability of different classes of anti-hypertensive agents to bring about regression of LVH, with agents that target the renin – angiotensin system (RAS) appearing superior to other agents, such as β-blockers and diuretics. The distinct pharmacological features of telmisartan suggest that it may be a suitable agent for managing hypertensive patients because it provides sustained control of blood pressure and appears to be very effective in reversing cardiac remodelling. Pre-clinical evaluation has demonstrated that telmisartan suppresses angiotensin II-induced collagen production and secretion by cultured fibroblasts, and reduces left ventricular weight in different animal models. Several clinical studies have demonstrated that, as well as reducing blood pressure (including 24-h mean ambulatory values), telmisartan brings about LVM regression in patients with hypertension, and improves left ventricular and left atrial function. Comparative studies have shown telmisartan's superiority compared with both hydrochlorothiazide and carvedilol in regressing LVM, the additional activity probably being explained by the sustained blood pressure control and the non-haemodynamic effects of targeting the RAS. The ultimate proof of the clinical value of telmisartan will be provided by the outcome trials ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial/Telmisartan Randomized AssessmeNt Study in aCE iNtolerant subjects with cardiovascular Disease (ONTARGET/TRANSCEND) currently being conducted in high-risk patients.

Effect of 24-Week Treatment with Telmisartan on Myocardial Structure and Function: Relationship to Insertion/Deletion Polymorphism of the Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Gene

The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of treatment with the angiotensin II receptor blocker telmisartan for 24 weeks on myocardial structure and function in patients with essential hypertension, and the relationship between this effect and the structural polymorphism of the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) gene. Thirty-five patients with essential hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) without other associated morbidity were included in an open-label, non-comparative study. The patients were treated with telmisartan 40-80 mg once daily. In the final analysis, there were 29 patients who received the full course of treatment and were evaluated echocardiographically before and after treatment by the same blinded investigator, and myocardial structure and function were analysed. The myocardial mass of the left ventricle was determined in M-mode. Assessment of diastolic function of transmitral blood flow was performed using pulsed Doppler echocardiography. All patients were genotyped for insertion/deletion (I/D) polymorphism of the ACE gene. Telmisartan produced a significant reduction in left ventricular mass index from 140.4 ± 48.6 to 128.7 ± 40.6 g/m2 that was accompanied by an improvement in characteristics of diastolic function. The decrease in LVH was more significant in the ID genotype group than in the II and DD groups. Thus, prolonged treatment with telmisartan is accompanied by an improvement in myocardial structure, expressed as a reduction in left ventricular mass and function that is more marked in patients with ID genotype of the ACE gene.

Antihypertensive efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers as monotherapy as evaluated by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: a meta-analysis

AIMS

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are available in different dosages and it is common clinical practice to uptitrate if blood pressure goal is not achieved with the initial dose. Data on the incremental antihypertensive efficacy with uptitration are scarce. It is also unclear if antihypertensive efficacy of losartan is comparable with other ARBs.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We systematically reviewed PubMed/EMBASE/Cochrane databases for all randomized clinical trials until December 2012 reporting 24 h ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) for most commonly available ARBs in patients with hypertension. Reduction in ABP with ARBs was evaluated at 25% of the maximum (max) dose, 50% of the max dose, and at the max dose. Comparison was made between 24 h BP-lowering effect of losartan 50 and 100 mg and other ARBs at 50% max dose and the max dose, respectively. Sixty-two studies enrolling 15 289 patients (mean age 56 years; 60% men) with a mean duration of 10 weeks were included in the analysis. Overall, the dose-response curve with ARBs was shallow with decrease of 10.3/6.7 (systolic/diastolic), 11.7/7.6, and 13.0/8.3 mmHg with 25% max dose, 50% max dose, and with the max dose of ARBs, respectively. Losartan in the dose of 50 mg lowered ABP less well than other ARBs at 50% max dose by 2.5 mmHg systolic (P < 0.0001) and 1.8 mmHg diastolic (P = 0.0003). Losartan 100 mg lowered ABP less well than other ARBs at max dose by 3.9 mm Hg systolic (P = 0.0002) and 2.2 mmHg diastolic (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

In this comprehensive analysis of the antihypertensive efficacy of ARBs by 24 h ABP, we observed a shallow dose-response curve, and uptitration marginally enhanced the antihypertensive efficacy. Blood pressure reduction with losartan at starting dose and at max dose was consistently inferior to the other ARBs.

Telmisartan: from lowering blood pressure to end-organ protection

The principal aim in the treatment of patients with high blood pressure is to ensure a maximum reduction in the total risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The renin-angiotensin system plays an important role in volume homeostasis and blood pressure regulation. The angiotensin receptor blockers control high blood pressure by preventing the binding of angiotensin II to the subtype 1 receptor, which is believed to mediate most of the physiologic actions of angiotensin II relevant to the regulation of blood pressure. Telmisartan is a widely used angiotensin receptor blocker with distinct pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties. Due to its long duration of action, it compares favorably with other angiotensin receptor blockers. Latest data from clinical trials and newest research regarding telmisartan will be reviewed in this article.

Effects of low-dose liquorice alone or in combination with hydrochlorothiazide on the plasma potassium in healthy volunteers

Both liquorice and thiazide diuretics have hypokalaemic effects. In spite of their prevalent use, there are no studies on hypokalaemia caused by the combination of liquorice and thiazides. We recruited 10 healthy volunteers in order to study the effects of 32 g liquorice alone or in combination with 25mg hydrochlorothiazide a day for 2 weeks. The trial had a randomized, open and crossover design. During the liquorice phase, there were no changes in plasma potassium, sodium, creatinine, renin activity, serum aldosterone, blood pressure or heart rate. Weight tended to increase by 0.4 kg (70.2 to 70.6 kg; p=0.056). During the liquorice-hydrochlorothiazide phase, the plasma potassium decreased by 0.32 mmol/l (p=0.0015), plasma renin activity increased by 1.6 microg/l/h (p=0.0064) and the weight decreased by 0.9 kg (70.5 to 69.6 kg, p=0.0065). Twenty per cent of the subjects (2/10) became hypokalaemic during the combined liquorice-hydrochlorothiazide treatment. Furthermore, both subjects developed hypokalaemia within the first week of the combined treatment leading to premature discontinuation. The evaluation of liquorice consumption habits is warranted when initiating thiazide medications to avoid the excessive risk of hypokalaemia associated with the combined use of low-dose liquorice and thiazide diuretics.

Telmisartan: a different angiotensin II receptor blocker protecting a different population?

The ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial (ONTARGET()) showed that the angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) telmisartan was as protective as the reference-standard ramipril in a broad cross-section of patients at increased cardiovascular risk, but was better tolerated. Telmisartan has a unique profile among ARBs, with a high affinity for the angiotensin II type 1 receptor, a long duration of receptor binding, a high lipophilicity and a long plasma half life. This leads to sustained and powerful blood pressure lowering when compared with the first marketed ARBs, such as losartan and valsartan. Some pharmacological properties of telmisartan clearly distinguish it from other members of the ARB class and may contribute to the clinical effects seen with telmisartan. A class effect for ARBs cannot be assumed. To date, telmisartan is the only ARB that has been shown to reduce cardiovascular risk in at-risk cardiovascular patients.

New standards in hypertension and cardiovascular risk management: focus on telmisartan

Blockade of the renin–angiotensin system is an important approach in managing high blood pressure, and has increasingly been shown to affect cardiovascular disease processes mediated by angiotensin II throughout the cardiovascular and renal continua. Telmisartan is an angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) displaying unique pharmacologic properties, including a longer half life than any other ARB, that result in large and sustained reductions of blood pressure. In patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension, telmisartan has proved superior to other antihypertensive agents (valsartan, losartan, ramipril, perindopril, and atenolol) in controlling blood pressure particularly towards the end of the dosing interval. There is also clinical evidence that telmisartan reduces left ventricular hypertrophy, reduces arterial stiffness and the recurrence of atrial fibrillation, and confers renoprotection. The ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial (ONTARGET^®) study has demonstrated that telmisartan has similar cardiovascular protective effects to ramipril in a large, high-risk patient population but was better tolerated. The powerful and sustained blood pressure control apparent in clinical trials, together with cardiovascular protection and tolerability demonstrated in ONTARGET^® means that telmisartan may be a preferred option for patients with hypertension.

Left ventricular mass and volume with telmisartan, ramipril, or combination in patients with previous atherosclerotic events or with diabetes mellitus (from the ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination With Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial [ONTARGET])

The ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial (ONTARGET) showed that the angiotensin receptor blocker telmisartan 80 mg was not inferior to the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ramipril 10 mg, and the combination no more effective than ramipril alone, in decreasing morbidity and mortality in patients with cardiovascular disease or high-risk diabetes. Although therapy targeting angiotensin II is known to decrease left ventricular (LV) mass and volume, the relative influence of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blocker, and their combination, on the heart remains unclear in this population. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed in 287 patients enrolled in ONTARGET, across 8 centers in 6 countries, at randomization and after 2-year treatment (90, 100, and 97 patients in the ramipril, telmisartan, and combination therapy groups, respectively). Baseline patient characteristics showed higher frequencies of coronary artery disease, Asian ethnicity, and use of statins and beta blockers than the main ONTARGET trial. LV mass decreased in all groups (p <0.0001 for each), but there were no significant differences in change in LV mass or volume among groups, except that LV mass index decreased more on combination versus telmisartan (p = 0.04). Key determinants of LV mass decrease were a history of hypertension (p = 0.03), baseline mass (p <0.0001), and decrease in systolic blood pressure (p <0.0001). The best magnetic resonance imaging predictor of composite events was end-systolic volume (p <0.0001). In conclusion, telmisartan and ramipril had similar effects on LV mass and volume, and combination therapy was not more effective, in high-risk patients with cardiovascular disease. These results are consistent with the major outcome findings of the main ONTARGET study.

Regression of Left Ventricular Mass by Antihypertensive Treatment

Blood pressure–lowering therapy reduces left ventricular mass, but the question of whether differences exist among drug classes has not been fully resolved. Our aim was to compare the effects of diuretics, β-blockers, calcium channel blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor blockers on left ventricular mass regression in patients with hypertension on the basis of prospective, randomized comparative studies. We performed meta-analyses, involving pooled pairwise comparisons of the drug classes and of each class versus other classes statistically combined, and meta-regression analyses to identify the determinants of the regression. The 75 relevant publications involved 84 pairwise comparisons and 6001 patients. Regression of left ventricular mass was significantly less ( P =0.01) with β-blockers (9.8%) than with angiotensin receptor blockers (12.5%), but none of the other analyzable pairwise comparisons between drug classes revealed significant differences ( P >0.10). In addition, β-blockers showed less regression than the other 4 classes statistically combined ( P <0.01), and regression was more pronounced with angiotensin receptor blockers versus the others ( P <0.01). In multivariable meta-regression analysis on all of the treatment arms, β-blocker treatment was a significant and negative predictor of the regression (−3.6%; P <0.01), but this was not the case for the other drug classes, including angiotensin receptor blockers. In conclusion, β-blockers show less regression of left ventricular mass, whereas angiotensin receptor blockers may induce larger regression. The inferiority of β-blockers appears to be more convincing than the superiority of angiotensin receptor blockers.

Pharmacoeconomics and quality of life analysis of telmisartan in hypertension treatment

Hypertension is a major public health problem, being one of the leading causes of death and disability worldwide and a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease. The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system plays an important role in volume homeostasis and blood pressure regulation, and is a target for several groups of pharmaceutical agents. Telmisartan, a highly selective AT1 receptor antagonist, fulfills all new criteria for antihypertensive agents: high effectiveness, high specificity, high compliance and fewer adverse effects. Several clinical trials and the clinical practice setting indicate substantial evidence that telmisartan, either as monotherapy or in combination with other antihypertensive drugs, provides long-term antihypertensive efficacy. In fact, telmisartan has the property to sustain blood pressure control throughout the 24-h dosage interval. Furthermore, telmisartan can play an important role in improving compliance, because of its documented good tolerability profile, which limits the adverse effects. This article provides the most recent data of the pharmacoeconomic position of telmisartan and its treatment effects on quality of life.

New opportunities in cardiovascular patient management: a survey of clinical data on the combination of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) differ in their actions on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS). ACE inhibitors prevent the formation of angiotensin II, although angiotensin II may still be generated by alternative pathways. However, ACE inhibitors interrupt bradykinin breakdown, which in turn potentially enhances nitric oxide and prostacyclin mechanisms. In contrast, ARBs selectively prevent the binding of angiotensin II to the angiotensin type 1 (AT(1)) receptor while leaving the potentially beneficial effects of the AT(2) receptor unaffected. The supposition is that dual blockade of the RAAS effectively overcomes the harmful effects of angiotensin II mediated by the AT(1) receptor while offering the additional effects of the ACE inhibitor. This concept was first evaluated clinically more than a decade ago in small-scale studies that were not sufficiently powered to conclusively demonstrate benefits from dual blockade. Subsequently, larger-scale trials have been conducted to determine the effects of a combination of an ACE inhibitor and an ARB in combating the effects of angiotensin II at different stages of cardiovascular and renal disease. This review explores these data in areas, such as hypertension, renal disease, and cardiovascular disease, and draws on this preliminary evidence to support the rationale for the Ongoing Telmisartan Alone in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial (ONTARGET) program, which aims to fully explore the clinical end points and effects of dual RAAS blockade in patients at high risk for cardiovascular outcomes.

Effective treatment of hypertension by AT(1) receptor antagonism: the past and future of telmisartan

Lowering blood pressure is the most effective treatment method to ensure a reduction in the total risk for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The renin-angiotensin system plays an important role in volume homeostasis and blood pressure regulation and is a target for several groups of pharmaceutical agents. Angiotensin II receptor blockers represent the newest class of antihypertensive compounds. They prevent the binding of angiotensin II to the subtype 1 receptor (AT(1)), which is believed to mediate most of the physiological actions relevant to the regulation of blood pressure. Telmisartan, a widely used AT(1) receptor antagonist, is a highly selective compound with high potency, a long duration of action and a tolerability profile similar to placebo. Numerous randomized clinical trials and community-based studies have demonstrated that oral telmisartan and combinations of telmisartan with hydrochlorothiazide are at least as effective in lowering blood pressure as all other hypertensive medications. This has been demonstrated in different populations of adult patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension, including patients with coexisting Type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome or renal impairment. Several large-scale, long-term, clinical endpoint studies are in progress to assess the beneficial effects of telmisartan on hypertension-related end-organ damage in patients at high risk of renal, cardiac and vascular damage whose blood pressure is well controlled. The most recent data from clinical trials and latest research regarding telmisartan will be reviewed in this article.

Prospects for the prevention of stroke

We are currently fighting a battle against a stroke epidemic. Implementation of new treatment strategies could save many patients in the future. The control of blood pressure is a major objective; however, choosing specific antihypertensive therapy (e.g. an agent blocking the renin-angiotensin system) is also important. The Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study demonstrates potential benefits beyond blood pressure reduction of prescribing an angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) compared with more established therapy in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). Losartan-based therapy brought about regression of LVH and reduced incidences of fatal and non-fatal stroke by 25%, new-onset diabetes by 25% and atrial fibrillation by 30% more than atenolol-based therapy for a similar blood pressure control and better tolerability. The Study on COgnition and Prognosis in the Elderly (SCOPE) study, although difficult to interpret, does not contradict an ARB benefit beyond blood pressure lowering in primary prevention linked to targeting the angiotensin type 1 receptor. The findings of the MOrbidity and mortality after Stroke, Eprosartan compared with nitrendipine in Secondary prevention (MOSES) trial suggest clear-cut ARB benefits independent of blood pressure lowering in secondary stroke prevention. Experimental findings and other clinical evidence further support the benefits of ARBs in stroke prevention. Telmisartan is an ARB with a particularly interesting profile for stroke; given the 24-hour efficacy with more pronounced protection against the morning blood pressure surge and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma activity at clinical doses. The unique properties of telmisartan for secondary stroke prevention are being tested in the Prevention Regimen For Effectively avoiding Second Strokes (PRoFESS) study.

Regression of left ventricular hypertrophy and improvement of diastolic function in hypertensive patients treated with telmisartan

OBJECTIVES

The study was designed to test whether or not the angiotensin II receptor blocker telmisartan brings about regression of left ventricular (LV) concentric hypertrophy and whether or not these changes are associated with improved diastolic filling.

METHODS

An echocardiographic follow-up study was performed in 85 hypertensive patients (systolic blood pressure [SBP] >140 mmHg, diastolic blood pressure [DBP] >90 mmHg) and mild-to-moderate LV hypertrophy (LV mass index related to body surface area [LVMI] 117-150 g/m2 for men and 105-150 g/m2 for women) treated with telmisartan monotherapy 40-80 mg once daily for 1 year. Blood pressure, LVMI, left atrial (LA) volumes, and diastolic function were determined at baseline and after 3, 6, 9, and 12 months of treatment. Blood pressure was also monitored at all visits. Diastolic function was assessed by examination of transmitral inflow and pulmonary vein flow patterns.

RESULTS

Telmisartan reduced blood pressure; after 12 months, the mean+/-S.D. SBP and DBP were reduced from 144+/-10 to 126+/-8 mmHg (p<0.001) and from 98+/-8 to 86+/-7 mmHg (p<0.001), respectively. The LVMI was decreased from 119+/-7 to 109+/-3 g/m2 (p<0.001) after 12 months' telmisartan treatment. All patients had diastolic dysfunction at baseline. After 12 months' telmisartan treatment, a normal pattern of transmitral inflow was present in 21% of patients. The regression of LV hypertrophy observed after 12 months was associated with increased peak early diastolic velocity/peak late diastolic velocity ratio from 0.60+/-0.18 to 0.83+/-0.20 (p<0.001), shortened isovolumic relaxation time (IVRT) from 110+/-13 to 105+/-13 ms (p<0.001), and decreased deceleration time from 229+/-30 to 215+/-28 ms (p=0.002). Univariate analysis showed that shortened IVRT was related to a reduction in the LVMI and LA maximal and minimal volumes. In the multivariate analysis, the reduction in LVMI and the reduction in LA maximal and minimal volumes were independently associated with IVRT reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

Telmisartan 40-80 mg is effective in LV hypertrophy regression in hypertensive patients. The reduction in LVMI due to telmisartan monotherapy was associated with a significant improvement of diastolic filling parameters and with a significant reduction of LA volumes.